|
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 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?
|
back and reading from page 8-9.
for saita's posts top of page 8 - not necessarily. and I also came to a different conclusion on nnn - he did smurfhunting but he's going about it with a purpose, and he made that clear. I'm reading filters and if I can tell you are using smurfhunting to actually advance the game for town, you're going to get a townread most likely. if you want to use other methods to do the same, that's fine too. scum don't necessarily need to blend in with the given conversation you mentioned either especially if it becomes obvious they are posting just to post when you are reading filters.
not taking a stance can be scummy - you could very well be hedging. and the posts in question were in the thick of conversation with nnn/warlock. that was the other thing I looked at before making that conclusion.
|
on page 11, looking at the so-called lurker filters as well.
can someone help me with understanding saita's posts or does anyone else think they might be scummy?
first, I read the keanu case and saita's reactions to it on page 11.
first, like a few people said, honestly for day 1 play, I saw keanu's case as furthering discussion, which is a towny trait. nothing inherently scummy about presenting the ideas and wanting to get more information out of a player who has given him some doubt for his alignment. also was explicitly stated "best lead I've got."
I look at saita's subsequent posts discussing backdoors. If town discusses the case and decide it's not worth merit, that's great, you can always drop it. pushing a case beyond reasonable discussion I'd say is scummy but that's not what I saw happening here. his posts bottom of page 10/top page 11 made it look to me like he was trying to push that unreasonably. also why it is impossible for good towns to possibly be wrong on "bad towns"? it seems like he (saita) was completely excluding that possibility.
then in post 204 he's saying he cannot see a town motive for it yet he sees the reason (it could be town???)
I'm still struggling to find how saita is making that case sound like it's exclusively scummy when it's clear he's trying to at least get a reaction from his target that will clarify things. to me, saita just looks bad. am I missing something here?
post 204/206 seem to be addressing completely conflicting points - even suggesting that Keanu is town, he's suggesting he's wasting space or still questioning why he has to explicitly state that, as if doing so was scummy.
|
On February 11 2016 05:33 Wartrukk wrote:Show nested quote +WartrukkOn February 10 2016 21:11 Wartrukk wrote: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? I guess if meta reads are all you are confident in making then a 99% smurf read is fine I just don't think it's 100% even if you truly believe you are the smurf detective. I used the word tunneled because I was tunneled on the idea that smurf huntingis super scummy and since you seemed, in my eyes, to be fighting me for no real reason. I'm over the smurf thing now. Bhaal lom is still in my leanscum pile, NNN is null because i admit he posted some stuff (like early game to saitama) that I was thinking. Vald is coming out of the gate strong andI think that's towny, especially if he replaced in on short notice. Saitama had a weird early game and I had him as leanscum last night but I haven't read too closely the 30 or so posts from last night.
another point that I feel needs some clarification - this sounds like mindmeld to me, which people from their perspective, view as towny, so why is he still null? just wondering.
also if you can further discuss saita, that might be great. he's the one active player I'm having difficulty understanding.
|
On February 11 2016 12:49 Bhaal LoM wrote:
nnn is null because I dislike his smurf hunting over scum hunting but his content otherwsie was okay. War seems townie too I think he was attacking nnn hard on his smurf hunting stuff.
since you're in the thread atm, wanted to ask you on this post - did you not feel that his smurf hunting had a purpose and he was just posting to post?
|
overall on the part of lynching lurkers, going to hunt for scum first, or discuss things that look questionable before falling back on a lurker, generally how I roll.
if I had to lynch any of the severely low content posters for uselessness right now, I'd say that 77Gold would "win" over unholyflare, if only for unholyflare making that one slight observation.
garg is okay to me.
|
On February 11 2016 23:15 Bhaal LoM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 23:09 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:On February 11 2016 22:59 Bhaal LoM wrote:On February 11 2016 22:54 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:On February 11 2016 22:49 Bhaal LoM wrote:On February 11 2016 22:46 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:On February 11 2016 22:40 Bhaal LoM wrote:On February 11 2016 22:36 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:Bhaal, And 77gold? You didn't check his filter either? Doesn't this quote from you imply that you compared all of the lurkers, garg(lurker that point in time), 77goldrom, and unholy? Like if any of the lurkers are scum prob is Gargame I did check gold's filter and I thought his content was meh. Are you going to do stuff on your own, or do you want to be directed with questions? I more a person who needs direction I will be honest with that :\ Do you still want to lynch gargamel after his recent activity? Who do you want to lynch and why? garg stuff from last night made him look better in my opinion. I don't want to lynch him atm unless something major comes up. On who to lynch: I don't know man to many lurkers >.< I normally hunt better when we got a lot of content(I was always a good late game player). So why not join garg in voting 77goldrom? At the very least it would get rid of a lurker. Because if he flips town then we got little to no info unless you talking about the people who voted for him. Also lurking is NAI for the most part anyways.
someone mentioned earlier in the thread that with overall low game activity lurking is quite viable for scum, I'm willing to bet there's probably one lurker out of the two as it is.
|
On February 11 2016 23:38 Bhaal LoM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 23:27 Valdiano wrote:On February 11 2016 12:49 Bhaal LoM wrote:
nnn is null because I dislike his smurf hunting over scum hunting but his content otherwsie was okay. War seems townie too I think he was attacking nnn hard on his smurf hunting stuff. since you're in the thread atm, wanted to ask you on this post - did you not feel that his smurf hunting had a purpose and he was just posting to post? I just didn't like smurf hunting in general in the thread which is why I didn't like it.
right, let me phrase it differently.
is this just a difference of opinion in scumhunting methods or do you actually believe what he is doing is scummy and can only come from scum?
also if you were to ignore the smurf stuff, would that change your read?
trying to make sure I understand where you are coming from here.
|
alright, placing my vote on Gold for now, afk.
|
sigh, real life is really getting in the way here. I'd say more but I'll reserve it for postgame.
to the people commenting on why my saita push didn't go anywhere, I'd have preferred to engage him more. The first response he had to me was satisfactory, it was the one where he said he wanted to find a motive behind the post, which is why he wanted to play a more or less reactive game.
also it was either keanu or robik, it's also hard to engage with the thread when you don't really have the time to play, only options are those people who are around when I am. bhall I was trying to pick his brain before I had to go again.
wartruckk's end of day comments - the wagon being trash makes no sense but at that time it's not like his vote would have done anything anyhow.
I'll return and catch up fully later sunday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
