|
On September 09 2016 06:45 NeverUnlucky wrote:I'm not sure how games are started here, so I will do some setup speculation. The "Death Whisperer" is a heavy counter to TPRs. + Show Spoiler +Death Whisperer
Win condition: Win anytime living mafia members equals or outnumbers living town members.
Ghost curse: Once per game at night, you can target one player.
If that person is protected by the benevolent ghosts' protection, he will die.
If that person is targeted by the spirit's KP, he will protected from it.
Death tracker: Spectral (can be used even if dead). If you successfully killed someone with your ghost curse, you will have access to the Benevolent Ghost QT after your death. You won't be able to post in it.
If you successfully protected someone with your ghost curse, you will have access to the Vengeful Spirit QT after your death. You won't be able to post in it.] Using a TPR ability unwisely can backfire terribly if countered by the DW. Do you think TPRs should act every night? If we ML today, the Vengeful spirit should not use his vigilante shot today as the DW will 100% target one of the three mafias. He has no reason to target townies as the Benevolent Ghost won't exist by then. Therefore, using the sole vigilante bullet N1 has the most chance of it going to waste. It is preferable to do an alignment check on any player and keep the shot for the following nights where the DW won't necessarily target a mafia.
Eh, I mean Death Whisperer is a counter to TPRs. It is basically their blue snipe I guess (Death -> suspected target for heal -> dead person)
No matter what about blue roles, we shouldn't really try to direct the spirts actions to much. Since mafia is in the thread rofl. I think we can expect the spirts to play smart, and prevent us from giving mafia TMI in regards to what a Veg/Ben spirt will do (since Death exist)
|
On September 09 2016 06:46 Tictock wrote:
Aw shucks, my streak of rolling town has come to an end.
Guess I wont be posting much so I don't accidentally give you guys info.
Bro, you haven't responded to me up in the mafia QT. But you give the townies your posts?
Shame.
*shames*
Eh, being serious, the last line bothers me. As TT is semi-setting himself up to not post much this game.
On September 09 2016 06:50 Grackaroni wrote:
Yay Shapelog is here. Hi Shapelog.
Hi Grack
Whats up?
On September 09 2016 06:51 Skynx wrote:
New players: "Hmm I'm nervous about my entry post so lemme post some comments on game mechanics to be safe"
Nothing like how I was in my first game.
I think like my 2nd post was tinfoil city.
|
On September 09 2016 06:46 Shapelog wrote:Show nested quote +This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
PL's here basically refer to Meta, inactivity, Behavior, or just the basics of scum hunting (I.E. Obv scum) I am guessing when you said NU cannot be a PL, you meant activity right?
I mean activity, yeah.
On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought.Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you.
My point says we shouldn't rely too much on LWs but that establishing good communication with the dead is important. While that's not some profound insight, there are clearly ideas being expressed here.
What are you even referring to with the bolded part? Because it bears no resemblance to anything I said.
"suggesting not to lynch" - No, I said we shouldn't rush into a lynch or policy-lynch early on. Nowhere did I imply that we shouldn't lynch. (which isn't even possible, lol)
"benefit of the doubt" - No I don't. Just because I'm new to the site doesn't mean I'm clueless.
|
Hmm, I wanted to say vivax came into the game and only has pointed out sus, things in other people's posts (aka following mafia agenda). But he did play around a little bit with skynx and palmar post.
|
On September 09 2016 06:55 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:46 Shapelog wrote:This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
PL's here basically refer to Meta, inactivity, Behavior, or just the basics of scum hunting (I.E. Obv scum) I am guessing when you said NU cannot be a PL, you meant activity right? I mean activity, yeah. Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought.Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. My point says we shouldn't rely too much on LWs but that establishing good communication with the dead is important. While that's not some profound insight, there are clearly ideas being expressed here. What are you even referring to with the bolded part? Because it bears no resemblance to anything I said. "suggesting not to lynch" - No, I said we shouldn't rush into a lynch or policy-lynch early on. Nowhere did I imply that we shouldn't lynch. (which isn't even possible, lol) "benefit of the doubt" - No I don't. Just because I'm new to the site doesn't mean I'm clueless.
What do you mean with "we should establish a way for dead townies to communicate" then?
Cause to me it reads exactly like "we should do stuff" without having an idea of how to implement such a feat.
|
On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought. Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you.
Also, she infered that town had PRs before they were lynched which shows she didn't correctly read the setup. It's NAI, but
To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot.
She ends her post with an excuse to why she wouldn't post in the upcoming hours. It's something scum tends to do more, but it still is NAI.
Scum-reading Calix.
@Vivax, don't give me or her the benefit of the doubt because we're "new", we aren't. We're both familiar to mafia. Giving either of us (especially her) a chance, it could be all we need to fly under your radar.
|
Nothing good on tv/twitch and you guys are no fun, I'm offski to bed.
|
On September 09 2016 06:59 Shapelog wrote:
Hmm, I wanted to say vivax came into the game and only has pointed out sus, things in other people's posts (aka following mafia agenda). But he did play around a little bit with skynx and palmar post.
I don't follow. Why would the opening posts be AI/ indicative of town as you suggest here? I just saw them as weird meta references and trolling so I'd like to know where you found potential townie motivation.
|
On September 09 2016 06:51 Skynx wrote:
New players: "Hmm I'm nervous about my entry post so lemme post some comments on game mechanics to be safe"
Where are you going with this? Do you scum-read us both? Posts without conclusions like this one aren't worth much.
On September 09 2016 06:46 Tictock wrote:
Aw shucks, my streak of rolling town has come to an end.
Guess I wont be posting much so I don't accidentally give you guys info.
Lel.
|
On September 09 2016 07:00 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:55 Calix wrote:On September 09 2016 06:46 Shapelog wrote:This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
PL's here basically refer to Meta, inactivity, Behavior, or just the basics of scum hunting (I.E. Obv scum) I am guessing when you said NU cannot be a PL, you meant activity right? I mean activity, yeah. On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought.Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. My point says we shouldn't rely too much on LWs but that establishing good communication with the dead is important. While that's not some profound insight, there are clearly ideas being expressed here. What are you even referring to with the bolded part? Because it bears no resemblance to anything I said. "suggesting not to lynch" - No, I said we shouldn't rush into a lynch or policy-lynch early on. Nowhere did I imply that we shouldn't lynch. (which isn't even possible, lol) "benefit of the doubt" - No I don't. Just because I'm new to the site doesn't mean I'm clueless. What do you mean with "we should establish a way for dead townies to communicate" then? Cause to me it reads exactly like "we should do stuff" without having an idea of how to implement such a feat.
I just suggested a way in which Sheriffs could communicate their results to the town by saying "they can get around the no-names rule by using post numbers" which is literally giving a suggestion as to how we communicate with the dead.
On September 09 2016 07:00 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought. Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. Also, she infered that town had PRs before they were lynched which shows she didn't correctly read the setup. It's NAI, but To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot. She ends her post with an excuse to why she wouldn't post in the upcoming hours. It's something scum tends to do more, but it still is NAI. Scum-reading Calix. @Vivax, don't give me or her the benefit of the doubt because we're "new", we aren't. We're both familiar to mafia. Giving either of us (especially her) a chance, it could be all we need to fly under your radar.
Using the correct pronouns is not a scum tell and never will be. You just used it yourself in your last line because it's a common word in the English language.
Also seriously? You are aware that I moved to a different site to get AWAY from crappy meta reads and the first thing you do is give me shit via a crappy meta read?
|
On September 09 2016 07:00 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought. Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. Also, she infered that town had PRs before they were lynched which shows she didn't correctly read the setup. It's NAI, but To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot. She ends her post with an excuse to why she wouldn't post in the upcoming hours. It's something scum tends to do more, but it still is NAI.Scum-reading Calix.
So you read is really on:
To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot.
Scum-reading Calix.
So....Your scum reading her, based off of (meta) pro-noun usage.
![[image loading]](http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/brilliant_david_tennant.gif)
On September 09 2016 07:01 Skynx wrote:
Nothing good on tv/twitch and you guys are no fun, I'm offski to bed.
Sson.
On September 09 2016 07:01 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 06:59 Shapelog wrote:
Hmm, I wanted to say vivax came into the game and only has pointed out sus, things in other people's posts (aka following mafia agenda). But he did play around a little bit with skynx and palmar post.
I don't follow. Why would the opening posts be AI/ indicative of town as you suggest here? I just saw them as weird meta references and trolling so I'd like to know where you found potential townie motivation.
Its not. I am not calling vivax town lol.
That post is basically NAI about vivax (as of now). I thought he came in and only posted sus. towards players, but his two earlier posts weren't that. Later, if he does, those two posts won't matter if all he is doing is shading people only (or roughly only)
only reason I posted it was to spark some more discussion lol.
|
On September 09 2016 07:05 Calix wrote:
Using the correct pronouns is not a scum tell and never will be. You just used it yourself in your last line because it's a common word in the English language.
Also seriously? You are aware that I moved to a different site to get AWAY from crappy meta reads and the first thing you do is give me shit via a crappy meta read?
It's a very mild scum tell and always will be.
Yes, I used it in my last line... in a different context. The "we" I used referred to you and me, not the town. Nice misrep attempt.
Ugh, I know, and I apologize. I won't use meta anymore. :3
In regards to your LW point: you stated that town should use surnames/quotes to refer to X player and then mentioned that scum can manipulate LWs. So you knew that what you were going to say wasn't going to be helpful for town anyways. Why did you feel the need to mention this?
What do you think of my first post?
How did you think that town had PRs before they were lynched?
|
I just suggested a way in which Sheriffs could communicate their results to the town by saying "they can get around the no-names rule by using post numbers" which is literally giving a suggestion as to how we communicate with the dead.
This doesn't work due to the mafia change LW mech.
I mean, (and this is for everyone), tell me if this LW is altered.
"Look at the posts between X-Y (or player list number), the suspect with a Check is hiding there."
|
On September 09 2016 07:05 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 07:00 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:55 Calix wrote:On September 09 2016 06:46 Shapelog wrote:This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
PL's here basically refer to Meta, inactivity, Behavior, or just the basics of scum hunting (I.E. Obv scum) I am guessing when you said NU cannot be a PL, you meant activity right? I mean activity, yeah. On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought.Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. My point says we shouldn't rely too much on LWs but that establishing good communication with the dead is important. While that's not some profound insight, there are clearly ideas being expressed here. What are you even referring to with the bolded part? Because it bears no resemblance to anything I said. "suggesting not to lynch" - No, I said we shouldn't rush into a lynch or policy-lynch early on. Nowhere did I imply that we shouldn't lynch. (which isn't even possible, lol) "benefit of the doubt" - No I don't. Just because I'm new to the site doesn't mean I'm clueless. What do you mean with "we should establish a way for dead townies to communicate" then? Cause to me it reads exactly like "we should do stuff" without having an idea of how to implement such a feat. I just suggested a way in which Sheriffs could communicate their results to the town by saying "they can get around the no-names rule by using post numbers" which is literally giving a suggestion as to how we communicate with the dead.Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 07:00 NeverUnlucky wrote:On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought. Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. Also, she infered that town had PRs before they were lynched which shows she didn't correctly read the setup. It's NAI, but To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot. She ends her post with an excuse to why she wouldn't post in the upcoming hours. It's something scum tends to do more, but it still is NAI. Scum-reading Calix. @Vivax, don't give me or her the benefit of the doubt because we're "new", we aren't. We're both familiar to mafia. Giving either of us (especially her) a chance, it could be all we need to fly under your radar. Using the correct pronouns is not a scum tell and never will be. You just used it yourself in your last line because it's a common word in the English language. Also seriously? You are aware that I moved to a different site to get AWAY from crappy meta reads and the first thing you do is give me shit via a crappy meta read?
But that's about your first point, not the second one.
Which makes it look to me like your second one might as well not be there.
Proceeding with the dissection:
There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. -> yes, but what's the point of saying this.
Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much -> And yet you suggest a plan that seems to deem them important.
but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented. -> Cause scum can manipulate LW, you want LW to be reliable communication? These two statements don't mesh together. Why? Cause scum can manipulate LW, no LWs are reliable.
Main point being: I found your second point there to just be fluff.
|
On September 09 2016 07:14 Shapelog wrote:
So....Your scum reading her, based off of (meta) pro-noun usage.
Incorrect. It's based off her fluff, her LW setup spec that didn't advantage town, and her misreading the setup.
The town roles are so straightforward, no town would think that there are PRs D1.
|
Hi,
Who wants to be my friend? I will nee protecting this game from scum as I find myself deactivated already. Maybe vivax will be my defender
|
On September 09 2016 07:14 Shapelog wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 07:00 NeverUnlucky wrote:On September 09 2016 06:46 Vivax wrote:On September 09 2016 06:37 Calix wrote:
It doesn't look like you guys do RVS and I don't relate to the few posts being made so far, so I'l just chip in with some thoughts on the setup. Not seeing anything particularly eye-popping aside from the following:
- Names aren't allowed in Last Wills but if you wanted to reference a player (e.g., say you're a Sheriff-Vig who wanted to say "I checked X/ this player is innocent/ guilty") then you could quote some post numbers by said player, quote something they said, etc. I don't think LWs will be that useful for the protectives unless nobody died on a certain night because telling the scum who was protected last night in the event of a kill just needlessly gives the scum information on what the healing roles are thinking. If anyone knows what the Doctor roles would even need to tell the town (aside from telling us who they scum-read or something) then I'm all ears.
- There's always the chance that the scum can interfere with the message being given. Although they can only rewrite LWs twice, we can't rely on the LWs much but I think it's good to establish a way for the dead townies to communicate with the rest of the thread because I'm not seeing a way that the scum manipulation of the LWs/ votes can be prevented.
- We might want to be careful with policy lynching apathetic/ inactive players or being sloppy with CFDs in general. I've been told that TL is more open to policy lynches compared to where I come from, but since lynched players become Sheriff-Vigs, I think it would be suboptimal play to give lazy players a KPN in the early stages. This point might be moot, however, as I don't know how anyone here plays or if anyone would qualify as policy-lynch material. (save for NU who I wouldn't consider a policy lynch)
Anyway, hi. It's pretty late for me so if I randomly drop off, don't be surprised. Bolded seems like fluff tbh cause you don't seem to have any own ideas to contribute for this part. "we have to find out what to do" . Who would've thought. Your last point is also pretty uninformative. It's like you're suggesting not to lynch. Doesn't look as bad as your second though. But still. You get a bit of benefit of the doubt for this being your first game here, but if somebody is meh for me right now it's you. Also, she infered that town had PRs before they were lynched which shows she didn't correctly read the setup. It's NAI, but To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot. She ends her post with an excuse to why she wouldn't post in the upcoming hours. It's something scum tends to do more, but it still is NAI.Scum-reading Calix. So you read is really on: Show nested quote +
To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot.
Scum-reading Calix.
So....Your scum reading her, based off of (meta) pro-noun usage. Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 07:01 Skynx wrote:
Nothing good on tv/twitch and you guys are no fun, I'm offski to bed. Sson. Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 07:01 Calix wrote:On September 09 2016 06:59 Shapelog wrote:
Hmm, I wanted to say vivax came into the game and only has pointed out sus, things in other people's posts (aka following mafia agenda). But he did play around a little bit with skynx and palmar post.
I don't follow. Why would the opening posts be AI/ indicative of town as you suggest here? I just saw them as weird meta references and trolling so I'd like to know where you found potential townie motivation. Its not. I am not calling vivax town lol. That post is basically NAI about vivax (as of now). I thought he came in and only posted sus. towards players, but his two earlier posts weren't that. Later, if he does, those two posts won't matter if all he is doing is shading people only (or roughly only) only reason I posted it was to spark some more discussion lol.
What makes you think he was throwing shade on other players (as opposed to say, trying to start discussion or scum-hunt)? I have my own thoughts below but would like your taken on this.
While I feel like he was misrepresenting what I said (with saying that I was 'suggesting we should No Lynch' when that's not possible and 'you haven't given any ideas on how to communicate with the dead') I can see someone trying to be provocative to get a reaction or move the conversation in a more productive direction so I'm not confident in my read of him. I'm also biased by default so I'm not sure wherever my scum lean on him is due to the "he's pushing me so he must be trying to mislynch me" bias or because he legitimately strawed my points. Leaning towards the latter given the examples above though.
|
@Never and calix
Since both of you are familiar with one another could you explain each other's scum/meta game slightly to us?
|
Vivax point is good (or at least points out the inconsistent in agenda)
On September 09 2016 07:21 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2016 07:14 Shapelog wrote:
So....Your scum reading her, based off of (meta) pro-noun usage.
Incorrect. It's based off her fluff, her LW setup spec that didn't advantage town, and her misreading the setup.The town roles are so straightforward, no town would think that there are PRs D1.
But you said the bold was NAI?
Also, she infered that town had PRs before they were lynched which shows she didn't correctly read the setup. It's NAI, To add to your point about her fluff: she used words like "we" -- Scum tend to use those words more than town to fit in the group. Scum!Calix uses "we" a lot.
I can kinda understand the rest.
|
On September 09 2016 07:23 Damdred wrote:
@Never and calix
Since both of you are familiar with one another could you explain each other's scum/meta game slightly to us?
No. Calix came to this site NOT TO BE META-READ.
My scum meta is obvious -- if I am not confrontational in my posts, I am scum. Bam. That easy. That's why I'm a bad player: I can be read using meta only.
Also, Vivax hit the nail on the head in his last post. It described how I felt about Calix's LW spec.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
