|
QUESTIONS FOR EVERYONE ELSE
77GoldRom
On February 10 2016 21:10 77GoldROM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 17:41 saitamaofonepunch wrote:On February 10 2016 16:34 77GoldROM wrote:
Late to the party. Hello all. I am Vanilla Town, how do you do? What's going on so far this game? Everyone is acting like they don't know how to play mafia who's to say any of you do? Well whatever I don't care.
If you don't care, why did you even press the hit button? Does saitamaofonepunch's arrogance offend you?
saitamaofonepunch
On February 10 2016 12:32 saitamaofonepunch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 12:18 keanuisgod wrote:
@saitama: What do you think of this OMGUSing stuff from NNN and Wartokk? And their behaviors so far (regarding that)? It's bad It's still NAI. It's just indicative that they are willing and able to be bad. Some things do in fact indicate, but they are based on motive- not action itself.
Bad in what way?
If your answer is "bad because it's NAI," then do you really expect the first posts of the game to be AI?
keanuisgod
On February 10 2016 12:01 keanuisgod wrote:
Considering NNN's recent attempts at smurf-hunting it does seem like it won't produce many useful results, thus allowing scum to smurfhunt on their own in their QT, but confusing the heck out of town (and most likely NNN if he acts on said "smurf reads")
Why would scum want to smurfhunt in their QT?
On February 10 2016 13:56 keanuisgod wrote:
Right now 5 players (including you) haven't made posts of significance. I feel like it wouldn't be a stretch for 1 or both scum to be in that group.
Of the remaining three that were (somewhat) actively posting (NNN, Warty and saita), for now their conversations felt like regular D1 banter, though some things they did/said can be taken notice for later in the day (to see how they follow up with them). Being active right off the bat in D1 is a plus too, at least if that motivation/activity is followed up in the rest of the game (another thing to take notice of).
And then there's me, a poor little townie trying to make a living in this new smurf world.
Is this a preliminary townread of myself, Wart and Saita? If it is, why not just say that plainly?
Wartrukk
On February 10 2016 21:11 Wartrukk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 19:47 unholyflare wrote:On February 10 2016 10:40 Wartrukk wrote:
So saying you're going to out smurfs, I say I think that's scummy (I still do) and after you go about trying to out smurfs you come back to my post and say "Joke phase lol"
Yeah, I'm the one fabricating reads, right? I don't understand how you or anyone can believe this. If, somehow, we know the identities of all/most of the people in the game, it would be easier to scumhunt. I think you're pretty suspicious for this as it suggests you have something to hide. I'm checking the thread before I go to bed but one more time, we can't know the identities of anyone for sure it only creates wifom
For some people we can be close to 100% sure of their identity. For instance, I am close to 100% sure that keanuisgod is shapelog.
Even if you disagree, wouldn't the obvious identity of a smurf be helpful for some rough but effective metaing? ie if keanu aka shapelog has a huge filter, that doesn't necessarily point to him being town.
On February 10 2016 11:50 Wartrukk wrote:
I'm going to take a break I think I'm tunneled on the smurf hunting idea too hard. I'm not taking back what I said as I still think there is a clear mafia motivation for it but I can't articulate them properly it seems
I didn't realize you were actually tunneled on me for smurf hunting. Exactly how sure were you that I was scum?
Bhaal LoM
On February 10 2016 13:47 Bhaal LoM wrote:
Good now tell me who you think could be a child of mine(scum) and why?
On February 10 2016 14:11 Bhaal LoM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 13:56 keanuisgod wrote:
Right now 5 players (including you) haven't made posts of significance. I feel like it wouldn't be a stretch for 1 or both scum to be in that group.
Of the remaining three that were (somewhat) actively posting (NNN, Warty and saita), for now their conversations felt like regular D1 banter, though some things they did/said can be taken notice for later in the day (to see how they follow up with them). Being active right off the bat in D1 is a plus too, at least if that motivation/activity is followed up in the rest of the game (another thing to take notice of).
And then there's me, a poor little townie trying to make a living in this new smurf world. Fair enough Mortal but considering the fact this game is rather slow paced atm because no one is really posting and I more of a analytical God when it comes to finding my children(scum). When more mortals enter the thread/talk more I will try to find my children(scum). If this helps their name is Imoen and Sarevok.
Why do you expect someone to have an answer to your 'who is scum' question when in the next quote you say it's impossible to put anything forward?
GargamelxD
On February 10 2016 12:26 GargamelxD wrote:
cant really take any posts seriously so far, no analysis possible becouse it still seems like standard banter
What needs to happen for you to start taking posts seriously?
|
Okay enough roleplaying for me it time to be a little bit more serious(If you don't know my name is from you prob never played Baldur's Gate or Baldur's Gate 2).
To answer your question nnn:
I was wanting to see if kean can read more into stuff than I could because I sometimes can't read into properly exp when I am tired >.< Also I wanted to see his thoughts at the time given the low activity of the thread >.>
|
No, omgus ing is bad because it is unreliable and useless.
|
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
|
Delisagrace has been replaced by Valdiano effective now
|
Welcome Deli can you give us some thoughts as soon you can please?
|
On February 10 2016 23:26 saitamaofonepunch wrote:
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
So is it correct to assume you have the same read on both Wartruck and myself: bad players who are leaning townie?
And your definition of omgus is what? And we are leaning town because of the omgusing itself or because we omgused in a townie way?
|
On February 11 2016 00:00 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 23:26 saitamaofonepunch wrote:
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
So is it correct to assume you have the same read on both Wartruck and myself: bad players who are leaning townie? And your definition of omgus is what? And we are leaning town because of the omgusing itself or because we omgused in a townie way?
That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication.
My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum.
Neither of you has progressed from null.
|
reading.
most people so far are playing nai. the smurf hunting, I see why it's happening but would rather focus on actual scum hunting. the way I see it? if the smurf hunting allows you to pull alignment indicative information, then have at it. if it's a distraction, then don't bother.
anyone trying to get in the way of smurf hunting where players are trying to do something useful with it, is probably scummy.
initial thoughts first nnn/wartrokk
easily can see town and scum motivations behind smurf hunting. so far for nnn's play, reading his filter, for the most part he's using bits and pieces to try and read people. It appears he's trying to get reactions or possibly see who is paying attention to the thread with him working for reads. that part looks towny. the post about filter padding resembles a nitpickiness that could be scummy but he did not take that particular post further - it was something that could have come easily from both alignments. so I was a bit cautious with that post, but I still think he's town
wartrokk - didn't like his opening post because the usa vs europe thing is obviously not scummy. his filer padding post, without knowing who he is, I think I know what he actually meant by that, but obv not going to put words in his mouth. (if it's what I think he meant, it's nai)
The gist of his post is that he's skeptical and whoever the player is, it is possible this person just doesn't metaread people, he's in the clear as long as he's not scumreading someone for something that isn't alignment indicative.
if wartrokk can explain why the way nnn is smurf hunting is scummy then I would feel a little better about his alignment. his final post didn't reach an absolute conclusion on nnn despite their ongoing conversation. regardless of who he was, he should have been able to do so. right now, it's a scumlean without a concrete conclusion
|
On February 11 2016 00:28 saitamaofonepunch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 00:00 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:On February 10 2016 23:26 saitamaofonepunch wrote:
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
So is it correct to assume you have the same read on both Wartruck and myself: bad players who are leaning townie? And your definition of omgus is what? And we are leaning town because of the omgusing itself or because we omgused in a townie way? That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication. My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum. Neither of you has progressed from null.
Nothing you said here makes sense.
That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication.
If we have done something that more often comes from town, then that should lead to a town lean. On the spectrum of scum to town, we should be on the town side of null.
My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum.
You are misrepresenting the reasons behind our suspicions. Wartrukk suspected me for smurf hunting. I suspected Wartrukk for being suspicious of smurf hunting. How did Wartrukk OMGUS at all?
I can understand why you'd think I OMGUSed, but realize that if he was suspecting someone else for smurf hunting, my suspicion would have still been there. So the true reason behind that suspicion isn't OMGUS either.
|
On February 10 2016 23:26 saitamaofonepunch wrote:
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
On February 11 2016 00:28 saitamaofonepunch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 00:00 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:
So is it correct to assume you have the same read on both Wartruck and myself: bad players who are leaning townie?
And your definition of omgus is what? And we are leaning town because of the omgusing itself or because we omgused in a townie way? That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication. My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum.Neither of you has progressed from null.
this post is difficult to understand. if I understand it correctly this is a bad post.
if this is the definition you believe then why are you sure that this couldn't come from scum?
omgus can come from either alignment.
second if you are suggesting the play is more often town then why are you suggesting that they have not progressed from null? what is the conditional element that could make them scum (implied by your first sentence in the final quote, correct)?
|
doublechecked saita's filter to make sure I didn't miss anything from conversation but there's nothing alignment indicative from it that could have applied to that last post.
although I do get an impression of posting just to post, reading his filter.
there were opportunities I think in 1-2 posts where he could have taken a stance on nnn/war
going to say a scumlean for now.
|
ebwop - there were opportunities in 1-2 posts where he could have taken a stance on nnn/war and he didn't.
|
On February 10 2016 12:01 keanuisgod wrote:
Considering NNN's recent attempts at smurf-hunting it does seem like it won't produce many useful results, thus allowing scum to smurfhunt on their own in their QT, but confusing the heck out of town (and most likely NNN if he acts on said "smurf reads")
On February 10 2016 13:56 keanuisgod wrote:
Right now 5 players (including you) haven't made posts of significance. I feel like it wouldn't be a stretch for 1 or both scum to be in that group.
Of the remaining three that were (somewhat) actively posting (NNN, Warty and saita), for now their conversations felt like regular D1 banter, though some things they did/said can be taken notice for later in the day (to see how they follow up with them). Being active right off the bat in D1 is a plus too, at least if that motivation/activity is followed up in the rest of the game (another thing to take notice of).
And then there's me, a poor little townie trying to make a living in this new smurf world.
so there's a few things I don't like about this reading your filter or that I don't understand. You are discussing the effects of nnn's scumhunting in this first quote but you are dismissing it as banter. what makes you think this presumably isn't alignment indicative?
|
I actually liking you Vald and might give you a pass for now. I think smurf hunting isn't really useful myself because it will distract us for trying to find scum.
|
On February 10 2016 22:51 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:keanuisgodShow nested quote +On February 10 2016 12:01 keanuisgod wrote:
Considering NNN's recent attempts at smurf-hunting it does seem like it won't produce many useful results, thus allowing scum to smurfhunt on their own in their QT, but confusing the heck out of town (and most likely NNN if he acts on said "smurf reads") Why would scum want to smurfhunt in their QT?
If I was scum I'd like to know who some of the players are, to better gauge how to react to them, to see if they will be a threat, etc (e.g if it's a vet, or someone that's known to be strong as town and'd be a danger in later cycles, etc).
Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 13:56 keanuisgod wrote:
Right now 5 players (including you) haven't made posts of significance. I feel like it wouldn't be a stretch for 1 or both scum to be in that group.
Of the remaining three that were (somewhat) actively posting (NNN, Warty and saita), for now their conversations felt like regular D1 banter, though some things they did/said can be taken notice for later in the day (to see how they follow up with them). Being active right off the bat in D1 is a plus too, at least if that motivation/activity is followed up in the rest of the game (another thing to take notice of).
And then there's me, a poor little townie trying to make a living in this new smurf world. Is this a preliminary townread of myself, Wart and Saita? If it is, why not just say that plainly?
I thought doing so would be unnecessary at this point in the game (and D1). But yes, I personally find this kind of attitude in D1 townie. I.e starting to be active right off the bat of the game, throwing around "bad" accusations (without caring how it makes you look like in the thread), etc.
|
On February 11 2016 01:14 Valdiano wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 12:01 keanuisgod wrote:
Considering NNN's recent attempts at smurf-hunting it does seem like it won't produce many useful results, thus allowing scum to smurfhunt on their own in their QT, but confusing the heck out of town (and most likely NNN if he acts on said "smurf reads") Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 13:56 keanuisgod wrote:
Right now 5 players (including you) haven't made posts of significance. I feel like it wouldn't be a stretch for 1 or both scum to be in that group.
Of the remaining three that were (somewhat) actively posting (NNN, Warty and saita), for now their conversations felt like regular D1 banter, though some things they did/said can be taken notice for later in the day (to see how they follow up with them). Being active right off the bat in D1 is a plus too, at least if that motivation/activity is followed up in the rest of the game (another thing to take notice of).
And then there's me, a poor little townie trying to make a living in this new smurf world. so there's a few things I don't like about this reading your filter or that I don't understand. You are discussing the effects of nnn's scumhunting in this first quote but you are dismissing it as banter. what makes you think this presumably isn't alignment indicative?
I presume you mean "smurfhunting" there.
Making "plans" or "plays" like these are, IMO, indeed D1 banter, and happen in many games. Rarely have I seen a game where one of these kind of discussions/plans results in anything alignment indicative. Townies could post it because they believe in it or want to stir up discussion, scummers could post them for "free posts". This includes this specific "smurfhunting" situation.
Down the line, both later in this day and later in the game, they will be irrelevant, so I don't really bother paying much attention to them. It's true that there may be some hidden motivations for some of these type of plans in some games that may merit analysis and may give you indications of town or scum motivation ... but it's not really that strong so I think it's better to put effort somewhere else.
|
NNN, I presume you still think Wartok is scum and will keep your vote on him? Or is this just a pressure thing?
|
On February 11 2016 00:59 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 00:28 saitamaofonepunch wrote:On February 11 2016 00:00 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:On February 10 2016 23:26 saitamaofonepunch wrote:
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
So is it correct to assume you have the same read on both Wartruck and myself: bad players who are leaning townie? And your definition of omgus is what? And we are leaning town because of the omgusing itself or because we omgused in a townie way? That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication. My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum. Neither of you has progressed from null. Nothing you said here makes sense. Show nested quote +That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication.
If we have done something that more often comes from town, then that should lead to a town lean. On the spectrum of scum to town, we should be on the town side of null. Show nested quote +My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum.
You are misrepresenting the reasons behind our suspicions. Wartrukk suspected me for smurf hunting. I suspected Wartrukk for being suspicious of smurf hunting. How did Wartrukk OMGUS at all? I can understand why you'd think I OMGUSed, but realize that if he was suspecting someone else for smurf hunting, my suspicion would have still been there. So the true reason behind that suspicion isn't OMGUS either.
Coming into the thread early and saying "I'm town" also comes from town more often than scum.
Do you seriously expect me to immediately give them a town lean? Please. I weigh my reads before I give them.
And I took it on someone's word that wartrukk was omgusing you- so lynch me for not reading.
Finally, you did specifically state at one time "you are scumreading me for X? Then you are scum" which is practically omgus.
I will find it later. On phone.
|
On February 11 2016 01:02 Valdiano wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 23:26 saitamaofonepunch wrote:
Unfortunately, it smacks a bit townie.
Also no I don't expect much alignment indication in the start of the game. Hence, so much stuff is NAI.
Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 00:28 saitamaofonepunch wrote:On February 11 2016 00:00 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:
So is it correct to assume you have the same read on both Wartruck and myself: bad players who are leaning townie?
And your definition of omgus is what? And we are leaning town because of the omgusing itself or because we omgused in a townie way? That assumption is not correct. You are players who have done a bad play that is more often town than scum in alignment indication. My definition of omgus is reading a player as scum simply because they read you as scum.Neither of you has progressed from null. this post is difficult to understand. if I understand it correctly this is a bad post. if this is the definition you believe then why are you sure that this couldn't come from scum? omgus can come from either alignment. second if you are suggesting the play is more often town then why are you suggesting that they have not progressed from null? what is the conditional element that could make them scum (implied by your first sentence in the final quote, correct)?
If you put the pieces of your own post together, you'd have your answer.
BECAUSE I am not a weak minded fool, and give others the benefit of the doubt in that regard as well as assuming they have deep insight to my posts (a mistake on my part even if everyone is a genius here), I assumed it would be implied by those two truths that ALTHOUGH TOWN DOES THAT MORE, it STILL could come from either alignment- therefore those two remain NULL.
How is this so difficult to see?
Am I really just a Class C hero?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
