|
Well tbh i don't see how "nightmare" is "slightly town-sided" but yeah.. ![](/mirror/smilies/smile.gif) As i said earlier i didn't think what Superbia said about you made you scum and yes, i was arguing with Rels how Rels' interpretation of the situation was in my opinion incorrect.
I don't read the thread any more "improperly" (if that's what you wanna call it) as mafia, especially when there is ~2-3 pages of content. And if we assume you are town i would definitely not call Superbia town like that, regardless of his alignment.
|
On November 02 2015 22:04 Xatalos wrote: Btw you said that HTS should name two townies other than Superbia? Are you implying that she shouldn't include herself on the team? At least in IRL Resistance, we usually thought that either the leader should be trusted (accepted with leader included) or not trusted (team refused). Did you usually make teams regardless of the leader? No, i don't want her to get the easy way out of just giving two reads as if she is mafia she can just name two townies and then say "well i know i am town so i am going of course".
Basically it has nothing to do with if she is gonna go on the mission or not, i just don't like the "Palmar approach" to Resistance (or like -- at least how he used to start Resistance games), as you basically exclude yourself on giving reads (other than easy ones) as you "just have to have this much townreads".
If you get what i am saying?
|
If i am scum here i am either giving a townread to my scumbuddy for no reason (which is stupid) or giving a townread on a townie for "no reason" (as would be the case at that point).
I don't do either, especially when the counter-part of the argument is you, who is usually shitty to argue with just based on the fact that you post that much. In either of the scenarios i do not even know how Superbia is gonna follow up, so it is basically a bad play for me to call him town as scum (andd i actually like playing as scum in Resistance -- and i don't play bad).
|
On November 02 2015 17:52 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 17:50 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well thank you captain obvious. I bet alot of players would not realize that unless you said it. You're welcome! I don't understand why you're hard townreading Superbia, who nitpicked something to death and made it the basis for a "mild" scumread. Is this your way of saying "i agree with the townread on rayn"?
|
On November 02 2015 22:25 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 22:18 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 17:52 Rels wrote:On November 02 2015 17:50 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well thank you captain obvious. I bet alot of players would not realize that unless you said it. You're welcome! I don't understand why you're hard townreading Superbia, who nitpicked something to death and made it the basis for a "mild" scumread. Is this your way of saying "i agree with the townread on rayn"? I don't understand. Maybe you quoted the wrong post bro. Can you point out to a post of yours where you imply you read me as town for my Superbia read? Because i really feel like your filter says the opposite.
|
On November 02 2015 22:16 Rels wrote: 1 - "I loved rayn's initial post of calling me town, this is exactly the type of opening I would expect out of town-rayn. I would love to hear some more depth behind his meta-read on Xat. But so far rayn is leaning town." Agree
here?
|
Not really. Or i can, but it doesn't tell anything to you. It basically has to do with what i have talked with him on skype after your game.
|
It basically has to do with how he approaches the game and how he gathers reads and what he does/doesn't do as scum. Obviously he could now "mimic" his townplay as mafia as he also knows we have talked about it but it would also give him away because he would have to say something that doesn't make sense from town perspective. And i don't see anything like that here.
|
I think that's a really shitty reason to call anyone scum Rels.
|
On November 02 2015 22:51 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 22:47 raynpelikoneet wrote: I think that's a really shitty reason to call anyone scum Rels. Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 17:57 raynpelikoneet wrote: He didn't really say "yes", he said "kinda" which can basically read as "changing your opinion without no real reason". That's a good reason. 1. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum would be nightmarish. 2. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum is not nightmarish, when Xatalos said it was kinda nightmarish. Yes and he explained why he said both of those things. Why don't you prove why his explanation does not make sense from town point of view instead of arguing the same old thing?
|
On November 02 2015 22:58 Xatalos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 22:54 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 22:51 Rels wrote:On November 02 2015 22:47 raynpelikoneet wrote: I think that's a really shitty reason to call anyone scum Rels. On November 02 2015 17:57 raynpelikoneet wrote: He didn't really say "yes", he said "kinda" which can basically read as "changing your opinion without no real reason". That's a good reason. 1. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum would be nightmarish. 2. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum is not nightmarish, when Xatalos said it was kinda nightmarish. Yes and he explained why he said both of those things. Why don't you prove why his explanation does not make sense from town point of view instead of arguing the same old thing? I think he explained 1 decently, but did he explain 2 btw? I mean saying that I said rolling scum is not nightmarish. Not that I think it even makes him scum, just wondering why you said both were explained? Yes he did. Initially after you argued with him about it.
|
On November 02 2015 22:57 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 22:54 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 22:51 Rels wrote:On November 02 2015 22:47 raynpelikoneet wrote: I think that's a really shitty reason to call anyone scum Rels. On November 02 2015 17:57 raynpelikoneet wrote: He didn't really say "yes", he said "kinda" which can basically read as "changing your opinion without no real reason". That's a good reason. 1. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum would be nightmarish. 2. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum is not nightmarish, when Xatalos said it was kinda nightmarish. Yes and he explained why he said both of those things. Why don't you prove why his explanation does not make sense from town point of view instead of arguing the same old thing? Here: Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 18:15 Rels wrote: Superbia is suspicious 'cause it would make sense with him deciding Xatalos is scum and finding a new reason to scumread him after the first. I agree that's not a strong point. However that's the scummiest thing in the thread right now. But the thing is he never used that reasoning to scumread Xatalos further.
|
On November 02 2015 23:02 Xatalos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 22:59 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 22:58 Xatalos wrote:On November 02 2015 22:54 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 22:51 Rels wrote:On November 02 2015 22:47 raynpelikoneet wrote: I think that's a really shitty reason to call anyone scum Rels. On November 02 2015 17:57 raynpelikoneet wrote: He didn't really say "yes", he said "kinda" which can basically read as "changing your opinion without no real reason". That's a good reason. 1. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum would be nightmarish. 2. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum is not nightmarish, when Xatalos said it was kinda nightmarish. Yes and he explained why he said both of those things. Why don't you prove why his explanation does not make sense from town point of view instead of arguing the same old thing? I think he explained 1 decently, but did he explain 2 btw? I mean saying that I said rolling scum is not nightmarish. Not that I think it even makes him scum, just wondering why you said both were explained? Yes he did. Initially after you argued with him about it. Hm... Can't find it? The post where Superbia says "now that we have concluded it's not actually nightmarish...." There, as i said how i read that is basically "now you said something really dumb so let's prove how dumb that actually is". The fact is Superbia never uses that as a reasoning to scumread you, not there, not after. Or does he? Where does he say that?
|
On November 02 2015 23:03 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 23:02 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 22:57 Rels wrote:On November 02 2015 22:54 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 22:51 Rels wrote:On November 02 2015 22:47 raynpelikoneet wrote: I think that's a really shitty reason to call anyone scum Rels. On November 02 2015 17:57 raynpelikoneet wrote: He didn't really say "yes", he said "kinda" which can basically read as "changing your opinion without no real reason". That's a good reason. 1. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum would be nightmarish. 2. Superbia scumreads Xatalos for saying rolling scum is not nightmarish, when Xatalos said it was kinda nightmarish. Yes and he explained why he said both of those things. Why don't you prove why his explanation does not make sense from town point of view instead of arguing the same old thing? Here: On November 02 2015 18:15 Rels wrote: Superbia is suspicious 'cause it would make sense with him deciding Xatalos is scum and finding a new reason to scumread him after the first. I agree that's not a strong point. However that's the scummiest thing in the thread right now. But the thing is he never used that reasoning to scumread Xatalos further. Yeah exactly. Now he townreads him when you townread him, and he is saying I have TMI on Xatalos. I think it is pretty clear why Superbia scumread Xatalos.
You are townreading Xatalos here, now, for the same reason Superbia is -- he even laid that out first unless i am mistaken. So how can you possibly scumread him for having a reasonable read? Like your read on him looks like "whatever Superbia does is scummy". Would you call him town if he did still scumread Xatalos?
I don't think him saying you have TMI on Xatalos is scummy, i thought he made a reasonable point.
|
On November 02 2015 23:07 Xatalos wrote:I'm not sure if I've ever played with Rels before. He's really this active as scum? He seems almost hyper-active ![](/mirror/smilies/puh2.gif) yes he is.
|
Hey Rels why do you actually think i am town?
|
On November 02 2015 23:46 kitaman27 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 18:21 raynpelikoneet wrote: kitaman because he is talking about setup which is a big no-no in this game unless you are scum and want to give advice to your teammates, like "this is something i would not recommend to do". Well the goal was indeed to give advice for my teammates. You don't need to automatically conclude that the advice was spy motivated. 36% success to 18% success is a significant drop off. The problem is that is actually bad advice.
|
On November 02 2015 23:53 ShoCkeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 23:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:On November 02 2015 23:46 kitaman27 wrote:On November 02 2015 18:21 raynpelikoneet wrote: kitaman because he is talking about setup which is a big no-no in this game unless you are scum and want to give advice to your teammates, like "this is something i would not recommend to do". Well the goal was indeed to give advice for my teammates. You don't need to automatically conclude that the advice was spy motivated. 36% success to 18% success is a significant drop off. The problem is that is actually bad advice. How is that bad advice?... There are certain situations where not picking yourself as town is the best move you can possibly make.
|
On November 02 2015 23:56 Half the Sky wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 23:43 ShoCkeyy wrote:On November 02 2015 23:31 Xatalos wrote:On November 02 2015 23:23 ShoCkeyy wrote:On November 02 2015 23:18 Xatalos wrote:On November 02 2015 23:15 ShoCkeyy wrote:I haven't finished reading the thread, but since I did play with rayn last game where he was mafia and this really brings up his current meta: On November 02 2015 19:05 raynpelikoneet wrote: Okay i gotta get off for some time. I am starting to get angry at this. He seriously starts to get "angry" when things do not go his way. On November 02 2015 19:15 Rels wrote: rayn leaving the thread as soon as he's being pushed is scum indicative. Please don't include him in a team. This is also my best suggestion as well. Which game are you referring to? I think he can get plenty angry as town too lol He can get angry as town too, haven't never seen him play as town. I'm just basing it off my previous game with him, which is why I rather not have him on the first mission. Here is the page where he gets angry because he messed up and/or things just didn't go his way. (Super mini mafia, you can read through it fairly quickly). http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/497064-star-fox-64-mini-mafia?page=5 Well, he did get pretty angry as town in the Vanilla game... The one that just ended. Tbh I think it's not alignment-indicative for him. How much can I trust you with that piece of information? The one thing I'm getting from you right now is that you're friends with rayn, as to where I see rayn being on the other side of the fence due to my previous encounters with him. I think your meta read on rayn is wrong, but at least I understand why it's wrong. And when you say you are "friends" with rayn, can you clarify that? Are you suggesting he's buddying rayn (this is scum indicative) - because I cannot tell from context. Or are you suggesting those two are legitimately townreading each other? Interesting.
|
Did anyone actually look at the game and why i got mad there?
|
|
|
|